EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2012 Ski Logik Rockstar 117mm underfoot with lots of tip and tail rocker
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2012 Ski Logik Rockstar 117mm underfoot with lots of tip and tail rocker

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 

Ski: 2012 Ski Logik Rockstar:  I don't remember all of the details, but it has a 117mm waist, substantial rocker tip and tail, and short (around 110cm) flat camber section underfoot. Rocker is fairly tall.


Length Skied: 179cm  Flex of the ski: stiff (as warned by the guys at the booth)


Conditions: 4,000 vertical feet (2 runs): Crud, a bit of soft uncut 6" deep snow, some firm bumps, high speed groomers, a narrow chute. 


Tester: 5 foot 9, 155lbs, ski 30-40 days a year, solid skier, skiing typically fast, can ski most anything on the mountain, prefer challenging steeper off-piste terrain, OK and improving in bumps.



This ski is a pretty stout ski; it may have a lot of rocker (looks to be on the order of 40cm both tip and tail), it has a fairly beefy layup.  The rocker profile is mid-rise.  Not as tall as the Super 7 I demoed that day, but taller than the Kastle and Blizzard low-rise rocker. I was told it "skis long" and is pretty stout by the guys at the booth. 


Crud and new snow: in soft crud, this is quite a ski. It really has a high speed limit, and mows through the soft snow.  The tip is quite stiff and somewhat unforgiving: it doesn't absorb terrain all that well, but more or less just blows through crap.  Not a bouncy, floaty ski like an S7 or a Bent.   It skis a bit long for a relatively short 179cm, and felt like a bigger radius ski than I had expected.  It likes to be tipped up onto edge and responds well to skier input. It also holds it's line well in soft snow, not getting washed out like, say a 2010 Gotama.  It was a touch bouncy in crud, probably due to the shorter underfoot profile than some, but then again, the stiff tip really transmits back to the skier; as long as I was on it, it wasn't an issue.   In the soft and uncut snow, I could ski it aggressively, I could be active with my feet, pulling them back at the top of the turn to tighten up the radius, and the ski allowed me to do so very well; it has a progressive flex in the shovel.  This ski, as expected, loved soft snow; a real treat in steeps as well.  With the pretty aggressively rockered tail, I couldn't load up the tail as much as I would have liked in a steep chute, as I would tend to lose the tail a bit.  In soft snow, not an issue, but the bite wasn't quite there as on the MX108. It however, well exceeded that of the S7. This is also a quick ski in tight spaces, especially edge to edge.  Overall, felt like the Ullr's Chariot I also skied, but much more suited to soft snow and crud, and more fun.  Also, perhaps a bit more expert-level in terms of performance and suitable ability. 


Bumps: short running length underfoot and stiffish flex didn't lend itself well to bump skiing.  The width wasn't as much an issue as the profile: it just felt a bit like skiing on metal pan in bumps.  A little scary. I would have liked some softer, fresh snow bumps to try it in; these were firm and icy. 


Groomers; gets you back to the lift.  As this really isn't a funshape, and it has no camber underfoot, it isn't really built for that terrain. Dull, no energy, skis short; no real surprise.




MX108: the Kastle had more bite on the steeps and scraped off snow, and a bit higher speed limit as well.  The Rockstar felt a bit quicker when active with the feet, you really could load up the tip and work the tail easily.  Kastle is softer at the tip as well.


S7: somewhat similar profile to the Rockstar, much softer and more suited to less aggressive skiers. The Rockstar is more of a power ski, stiffer tail, and doesn't really like back seat driving. The S7 lets you get away with more, comes across as more relaxed, but doesn't bite or have the quickness like the Rockstar does.  


Bottom line: a very versatile soft snow ski, well suited to steeps, fast skiing, and good skiers.  I would perfer less (or lower rise) tail rocker for a bit more bite in mixed conditions; the tip felt just about right for aggressive skiing in soft snow.  Overall, a lot of fun and an enjoyable ski. 





post #2 of 12

Just looking for confirmation if the Rock Star really is flat underfoot or if it has some camber.  The SKILOGIK site says it's "near flat" camber.  Anyone else do any laps on it yet?

post #3 of 12

I have a pair (188) and have only skiied 6-7 runs on early groomed snow at Loveland BUT I can confirm that there is maybe a few cm's of camber when the skis are pressed together, very near flat as advertised.  That said, they held nicely on pretty firm snow which is obviously not what they're designed for.

post #4 of 12

Well I finally got to get these out on 12-15" of fresh snow last Sunday on Snowmass.  Knowing our way around we skied a lot of untracked snow in the morning and then some chopped up runs in the early afternoon and finally some soft groomed snow later in the day.  I have to say this was the most fun I've had skiing on a resort in many years.  It should be noted that I have never skied on a rockered ski before but these things made ripping down black pitched glades an absolute blast!  Even the bump runs with that much snow on them were super fun.  I felt like I could turn on a dime completely at will!  Later in the day I hooked up with some slower skiers and we did a few runs on the groomed terrain and I have to say, as soft as the groomers were I could still get those fat rockered skis very quickly from edge to edge and was definitely using the whole ski which I honestly didin't expect.  None of the really steep stuff was open at the time (we're having a real avalanche problem out here at the moment) but I can't wait to take them down some of my favorite chutes.  I felt like a kid on these things, seriously!



post #5 of 12

I skied the 178cm Rock Star this past week at Heavenly in Sierra Cement, chop, and windblown (skied out cement that if you stuck your pole in the snow it would go in 3-4 feet).  I am waiting for some more days on it, skiing at more speed and at least a few more runs down Mott (I was with one of my kids for most of the time) before writing a full review.  So far so good.  I weigh 20 lb more that dawgcatching so my initial thoughts are a bit different than his:


1) The ski rocks in powder, chop and crud.  The stiff tips have no trouble floating in the powder due to their size and the later day chop was not even an issue.  I think the dawg's description of the tip blowing through crap is about right.

2) The ski is unusual because it can also be easily skied slowly and at moderate speeds. So long as you are balanced, this ski works at every speed applied to it despite--or perhaps--of the relative stiffness.  Flexing the ski makes you think it is just for experts, but I think anyone who can ski parallel could ski this without a problem provided they are not in the back seat.

3) The smaller and softer bumps I encountered were a joy on this ski.  There was no hard snow or large bumps to ski on while I was there.

4) The learning curve was maybe three turns.  Just stay neutral (to me that means hardpack "neutral") and go.   

5) Tree skiing at Heavenly is, well, like skiing groomers compared to the tight trees found in the east.  Regardless, these skis are super quick with a very tight radius.  What impressed me is that they could be skied slowly and at speed.  I initially thought that I could easily ski this at the longer length, but then again I had no trouble when I took it up to a little speed.  At age 57, the 178cm is probably right since my "skiing stupid" days are long over.

6) These may be the easiest drifting skis I was ever on in soft or windswept snow.  The turning radius doesn't get in the way of drifting longer radiused turns in powder.

7) These were an absolute blast on groomers.  I could carve turns with them in the soft snow without a lot of effort (they are 117 underfoot).  The ski has a smidgen of camber and this seems to help on groomers.  There was no hard snow to try them on.  The 14m radius does make for quick turns, perhaps too quick, when just rolling your knees.  There was no issue steering these fats.

8) These skis, unlike my older Ullr's, have a top sheet with the "clear iron" (that is the material over the marquetry) given a slight radius.  I didn't ask, but imagine this was done to prevent chipping.  If so, it worked.

9) The skis arrived with perfectly flat bottoms.  I have no idea if the edge angles are consistent (nothing in the garage to measure them), not that it matters in powder. 

10) The Rock Star is billed as a "Big Mountain Show Skiing" ski with the stiffer tip and tail making it easier to pop kickers.  I no longer huck anything taller than me and can't comment on that.  I do think Ski Logik is either smart or lucky going with the stiffer extremities when many others build skis with a relatively softer tip.  The stiffness paradoxically seems to have added to the versatility of the Rock Star while allowing it to be skied at a relatively shorter length. 

11) Unlike some people here, I don't own a ski shop and don't test a zillion skis a year.  Therefore, I am not qualified to make a lot of comparisons.  I did demo the S7 two years ago and believe it skis softer than the Rock Star.  The Rock Star  seems more precise, yet can also be skied as slowly provided you ski neutral.  I like the Rock Star better because it is more precise, quicker  and more fun when on the groomers going back to the lift.

Edited by quant2325 - 12/28/12 at 9:43am
post #6 of 12

We just received our test pair of SkiLogik RockStar 188s...as soon as we get them mounted up we will have a review ASAP.  Really beautiful looking ski with great fit and finish!  Stay tuned.


Happy New Year!

post #7 of 12

Dawg, at the risk of highjacking the thread, you said you were on the Ullr's Chariot.  Was it the twin tip or the rockered version?  If it was the twin tip (that Kelty was impressed with), I'd appreciate your opinion.

post #8 of 12
Thread Starter 
Originally Posted by mkgil View Post

Dawg, at the risk of highjacking the thread, you said you were on the Ullr's Chariot.  Was it the twin tip or the rockered version?  If it was the twin tip (that Kelty was impressed with), I'd appreciate your opinion.

I think I was on the flat tail version.  


Ullr's Chariot got a solid 2 thumbs down from me.  Yuk.  Wouldn't ski it if they were paying me to. At least it looked classy. I usually can find something positive about each ski, somewhere, for someone, but that ski had no redeeming qualities aside from the nice woodwork.  Way too turny; felt demanding, stiff, hooky, planky, and lifeless.  I am sure somebody likes it, but it wasn't for me. 

post #9 of 12

Not to contradict Dawg, but I remember his review of the Chariot RL ski, not the TT version because I bought a pair of Chariot TT's from him shortly after his review and it had me worried. I absolutely love the TT version and a friend of mine who is about Dawg's size loves his as well. Dawg wasn't the only one to not warm up to the RL version of the Chariot. The TT is a very different ski than the RL from the info I have seen posted. 

post #10 of 12

The best Ski Logik Ski for off piste skiing that I've tried (and I have tried a few...) is the little talked about Howitzer.  It's a great ski: 110mm underfoot, modest tip rise, twin but not rockered tail and some camber.  The flex is really smooth.  And it doesn't ski at all like the Ullr's Chariot.  I really like it for deeper snow in tight trees and late day crud.


I am eager to see Exotic Ski's review of the Rockstar.  


The reviews of the Ullr's Chariot RL have been universally below average---even Keelty dislikes them (while loving the TT version).

post #11 of 12

Just came back from a week at Niseko, skiing mainly in the trees. Lots of powder but also lots of skiers, so I had a wide mix of virgin ankle- and knee-deep powder, chopped-up powder, heavy wet powder on groomers and bumps, powder, and did I mention powder?


I'm 180cm, 84kg. Skied the Ullr's Chariot RL in about a 180-something length on day 1. Meh. Swapped them out for a pair of Rossi S7s in 188cm (?). Chalk and cheese. The S7s were so easy to ski on, I was smiling and laughing after a few minutes. Flappy and hard to control on groomers though. Then on day 4 I went to the Rockstars (yes, this is actually an on-topic post) and they were perfect. Fantastic control in the trees, although they prefer tight turns to big sweepers; they just brushed all challenges aside. I pointed them and they went there. Superb fun. Completely different proposition on steep, deep-powder-covered bumps though. The ski's stiffness made turns very hard going for me. Or maybe I'm just a crap bumps skier (but hey, I used to fang through moguls on my old Kästle 205s, so that can't be right).


On our final day we hit Rusutsu with thigh-to-waist-deep fresh dry virgin powder through the trees, everywhere you went. Skiing Nirvana but also very hard work, and the Rockstars were the perfect tool for the job, as long as I stayed forward. They caned me every time I got lazy and went back-seat, but rewarded me in spades whenever I stayed forward and put in some effort.


My impression: A perfect powder ski for those who like to stay in control. Not an "easy rider" ski and only so-so on groomers, although not as flappy-floppy as the S7s and nowhere near as terrifying on fast run-outs.


Final point: the marquetry graphics on these skis are simply stunning, eliciting many comments from envious punters. Buy a pair and if you don't like them, just hang them on your living-room wall - they will still give you value for money.

post #12 of 12

Rockstar review is coming...waiting for some more 3D snow to fall to give them a full, fair review...but I echo coxaca's remarks about feeling the stiff flex in bumps, and rewarding a driving style rather than passive.  These have black locust sidewalls, and are not floppy.  Much more stable at speed, not a floppy surfer, but a surfable cutting tool with strength and stability...Tuning them properly is critical, like any ski with this kind of geometry...the initial grind we did with very little bevel and sharp tip-to-tail (I like to run a ski up from sharp and very slight bevel to increasing degrees of bevel and detune to find its sweet spot of hardpack grip and agility/forgiveness) resulted in a reluctant turning ski with remarkable edge grip....gradual detune and bevel gives it a good combination of grip vs. slarvy behavior...pick your poison.


I will post a full review ASAP...I have only had the ski on hardpack, bumpy, boot-deep freshies and packed powder so far....waiting on snow....waiting on snow...

I have also skied the Howitzer, which is a very different ski, but with a similar stiff-feel compared to some other skis in that category.  Much different geometry than the Rock Star...more high-speed oriented, less nimble in tight stuff...stay tuned...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2012 Ski Logik Rockstar 117mm underfoot with lots of tip and tail rocker